Seller Plus, Premium.

[smashradio]

3 hours ago, vickiespencer said:

Are the people currently enrolled in the seller plus program getting to keep their seller plus manager?

  As far as I know, yes, at least until they move on to bigger and better things, as millenials and Gen Z so often do these days. I don't think there will be changes here unless they hire a bunch of new ones, and start spreading us out to lessen their workload. I'm not sure how the pressure is at the moment. People seem to have different experiences here. My SM is super-quick and always takes the time to respond thoroughly. Others, from what I hear, struggle to get a response that makes sense or have to wait for a long time. 

2 minutes ago, danno1950 said:

From that analysis, it sure does make sense to go full on paywall! I just hope Fiverr is moving in that direction behind the scenes. I certainly hope they have done some financial calculations of making that change - it would just be a responsible direction to evaluate this option. Otherwise, it would mean they were hanging on to the old mindset that has held the platform back.

It does. And it's what we've been saying for a long time. Having 300.000 sellers in a single category makes no sense. Most of the gigs are just unnecessary noise on the platform and I'm sure the remaning 100k sellers would scoop up the business and start increasing rates, just as @newsmike said. Choice paralysis is a real thing. 

[danno1950]

14 hours ago, smashradio said:

Choice paralysis is a real thing. 

Great way to phrase it! Unnecessary noise is precisely the pain that other sellers have to deal with. 

19 hours ago, newsmike said:

We see this every day on the forum, the sellers from a certain location that say, "I just made 7 gigs yesterday, stay online 26 hours every day, and as marketing expert, but make no sales, pray for me." 

With a full on pay site, we could eliminate this type of seller clutter that holds back the platform.

Edited September 14, 2022 by danno1950

[danno1950]

@mjensen415, could you read the last several entries on this thread, and maybe pass them along to the appropriate parties. It appears that some reputable sellers have been talking about a full pay site for Fiverr for a while, and the interest in doing so is building some momentum. In the interest of growing Fiverr as a platform, it seems to be a viable option to consider.

[newsmike]

14 minutes ago, danno1950 said:

@mjensen415, could you read the last several entries on this thread, and maybe pass them along to the appropriate parties. It appears that some reputable sellers have been talking about a full pay site for Fiverr for a while, and the interest in doing so is building some momentum. In the interest of growing Fiverr as a platform, it seems to be a viable option to consider.

Hopefully @frank_d can also relay the info. 

[danno1950]

Just in case this might get read and move the conversation, I replied to a Micha Kaufman tweet about "being innovative in the workplace."

[terrygrantvo]

2 hours ago, newsmike said:

Right. If you have 300,000 people selling photoshop services, and you force 2/3 off by instituting a "pay to sell" model, the business does not dry up. The remaining 100,000 will absorb the business, probably at higher rates which means bigger 20% for Fiverr, so win-win-win. Best sellers make more money, Fiverr gets 20% of higher priced sales, and buyers get better quality sellers.

Boom!  

Right, and I agree fully with all of this (srsly - bring it on), but that whole 'force 2/3 off' thing is exactly why they'll never do it.

But man oh man, if they do? I hope they sell tickets to the next shareholder meeting after, because I'll buy one - VIP courtside - just to listen to them explain to shareholders why their user base just dropped by 2/3rds. 🙂

 

[smashradio]

21 minutes ago, terrygrantvo said:

Right, and I agree fully with all of this (srsly - bring it on), but that whole 'force 2/3 off' thing is exactly why they'll never do it.

But man oh man, if they do? I hope they sell tickets to the next shareholder meeting after, because I'll buy one - VIP courtside - just to listen to them explain to shareholders why their user base just dropped by 2/3rds. 🙂

 

I'd be one of the shareholders celebrating it, because the userbase is only perceived value. The real value lies in the ability to grow in terms of revenue and take. And if Fiverr can increase that, while increasing its reputation, and earn more money? Well - to hell with the userbase. Fiverr isn't a SoMe platform, no matter how much they call it a "community". 

But sure, it would create a stir. I'd love to be there for it. 

[danno1950]

43 minutes ago, terrygrantvo said:

Right, and I agree fully with all of this (srsly - bring it on), but that whole 'force 2/3 off' thing is exactly why they'll never do it.

But man oh man, if they do? I hope they sell tickets to the next shareholder meeting after, because I'll buy one - VIP courtside - just to listen to them explain to shareholders why their user base just dropped by 2/3rds.

 

46 minutes ago, terrygrantvo said:

If you have 300,000 people selling photoshop services, and you force 2/3 off by instituting a "pay to sell" model, the business does not dry up. The remaining 100,000 will absorb the business, probably at higher rates which means bigger 20% for Fiverr, so win-win-win.

If the user base dropped off by 2/3, and the revenues stayed steady or even began to climb, I think the shareholders would gladly accept that tradeoff. 

[newsmike]

12 hours ago, terrygrantvo said:

just to listen to them explain to shareholders why their user base just dropped by 2/3rds. 🙂

Shareholders don't care about number of users, they care about profits. If you made 1 million dollars with 30M users, vs 2 million dollars with 10M users, which is the win? We are talking about culling the folks who don't think investing $29/month is worth it, so they all have to be pretty low earning sellers. The serious sellers will immediately pick up that slack at higher rates. 

11 hours ago, danno1950 said:

If the user base dropped off by 2/3, and the revenues stayed steady or even began to climb, I think the shareholders would gladly accept that tradeoff. 

Especially since it costs money to keep that 2/3 "low hanging fruit" on the site. They eat up CS time, bandwidth, server space, etc...  Wanna bet 95% of CS time is consumed by problems created by bad sellers as opposed to quality sellers? And if those sellers are not making sales or paying a monthly fee for SP or a pay wall, then they are actually an expense which we all are paying. Not to mention the drag on the algo.  

Edited September 14, 2022 by newsmike

[vickieito]

4 minutes ago, newsmike said:

Wanna bet 95% of CS time is consumed by problems created by bad sellers as opposed to quality sellers?

...I think the forum is an accurate reflection of what CS might be dealing with.

Also, I'm really shocked at some of the gigs that I do see on the marketplace, that are somehow getting past the filters. Even though Fiverr is getting more strict on who they're letting in, there are still many sellers who don't know the basics of quality salesmanship. I think Fiverr only depends on a reporting system to clean those up (which isn't enough).

[newsmike]

Just now, vickieito said:

...I think the forum is an accurate reflection of what CS might be dealing with.

You get a Gold Star for the most brilliant analysis of this in 16 perfectly spoken words!

[gongor32]

3 hours ago, newsmike said:

Right. If you have 300,000 people selling photoshop services, and you force 2/3 off by instituting a "pay to sell" model, the business does not dry up. The remaining 100,000 will absorb the business, probably at higher rates which means bigger 20% for Fiverr, so win-win-win. Best sellers make more money, Fiverr gets 20% of higher priced sales, and buyers get better quality sellers.

It should be probably win win. Except 5$ gigs may have been appealing to clients, bringing customers in first place and converting into avid users.  Platform may grow little bit slower for the time being, and number people doesn't like this. 

[newsmike]

7 minutes ago, gongor32 said:

It should be probably win win. Except 5$ gigs may have been appealing to clients, bringing customers in first place and converting into avid users.  Platform may grow little bit slower for the time being, and number people doesn't like this. 

Sellers can still choose to sell at $5, because there is absolutely not  a penny of investment required on their part in the current model. Maybe if they had to pay every month, they would raise rates. If not, they can leave, there are plenty of others to fill the void. Playing to the preferences of the $5 buyer/seller is the sure road to hell for Fiverr if it wants to become what it seems to want to be when it grows up. 

It is equally important to shed both the $5 buyer and the $5 seller.

Edited September 15, 2022 by newsmike

[danno1950]

31 minutes ago, newsmike said:

Playing to the preferences of the $5 buyer/seller is the sure road to hell for Fiverr if it wants to become what it seems to want to be when it grows up. 

Absolutely!

[newsmike]

6 minutes ago, danno1950 said:

Absolutely!

Crazy idea which allows Fiverr to temporarily hang on to their namesake. What if it cost $5 per gig, per month to sell. Here's the pitch:

"Fiverr! Start freelancing for just $5"  

@mjensen415 I'll do the VO for free, please tell Micah. 

 

Edited September 15, 2022 by newsmike

[vickieito]

31 minutes ago, newsmike said:

"Fiverr! Start freelancing for just $5"  

What a great way to rebrand the Fiverr image!

I'd be for that one ($5 per gig might be a bit pricey but not if it includes premium Seller Plus features).

[fiveroptic1]

Just had a meet with my SM. She wasn't able to give too much away, as nothing has been announced yet, but confirmed that there will be 2 tiers. She said that I will be eligible for both (not sure that will be the same across the board), and that it will be implemented soon - whatever 'soon' means! Not much, I know, but a bit of an update!  

[donnovan86]

1 hour ago, fiveroptic1 said:

She said that I will be eligible for both (not sure that will be the same across the board), and that it will be implemented soon - whatever 'soon' means! Not much, I know, but a bit of an update!  

I expected them to not say much, pretty sure the tiers are in development. I think it will be launched within the next few months, until the end of 2022. Maybe faster, who knows.

[danno1950]

1 hour ago, fiveroptic1 said:

Not much, I know, but a bit of an update!

It's more than we had! 😀 Thanks for the update!

[arttechno]

I am still dreaming to have the seller plus option enabled 

[katakatica]

On 9/15/2022 at 2:41 AM, newsmike said:

"Fiverr! Start freelancing for just $5"  

 

I think I'm sold. 
If it's a relatively small starting fee, I think it might benefit everyone (sellers and buyers, and the site). I guess what I'm worried about the 'paywall' would be actually talented people not having that 'extra' money to spend, but I've been thinking and... it would erase so much of the spam/scam/fake orders/etc.

In the end, I feel like people who are serious about their business will know that a small investment is normal (I did not know 5 years ago, but if I was starting out now, I'd likely be aware of it.)
 I'm honestly curious about all the changes coming and hoping that they will help with a lot of the 'nasty' stuff going on.

(though I'm not sure what will stop people from creating multiple buyer accounts and spamming 'gimme order' that way but... I think there'd also be ways to filter that out so!)

[shalock]

8 hours ago, katakatica said:

(I did not know 5 years ago, but if I was starting out now, I'd likely be aware of it.)

I totally understand you! When i started to freelance i was very reluctant to pay for it, specially because i was doing 0$! But as i started to work on it and things like promoted gigs and then plus came out, i really started to appreciate it.

 

8 hours ago, katakatica said:

(though I'm not sure what will stop people from creating multiple buyer accounts and spamming 'gimme order' that way but... I think there'd also be ways to filter that out so!)

I'm sure there will always be a way to circumvent whatever measures Fiverr puts in place, unless they start charging to open an account or some drastic measure like that. However I think it could help a lot.

[rudra_dey]

But some people didn't find the new update? why?

[donnovan86]

4 hours ago, rudra_dey said:

But some people didn't find the new update? why?

It's not an update. Just an email sent to some/most/all (hard to know) Seller Plus members that have an active subscription, informing them that a new tier is coming and they receive an automatic update to the new tier for free. 

[vickiespencer]

On 9/15/2022 at 6:08 AM, fiveroptic1 said:

I know, but a bit of an update!  

 

On 9/15/2022 at 8:08 AM, danno1950 said:

It's more than we had! 😀

From an email I got from my SPM:

"Everyone currently enrolled in Seller Plus is eligible for Seller Plus Premium at the same rates that you're currently paying. You should have received an email about it as well but, even if it didn't make it to your inbox, rest assured since you're already in the program, nothing will change for you unless you choose to go down to the Standard level."